refactor(api): Enable more type-checking inside pipette_handler.py #16523
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
The lack of parameter type annotations meant that these function bodies were mostly not type-checked. The overloads were not doing anything as far as I can tell, so just delete them to fix this.
sfoster1
approved these changes
Oct 28, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Overview
Delete some
@overloads that didn't seem like they were doing anything, and reincorporate their parameter annotations into the main function definitions.Formerly, the main function bodies were mostly not type-checked because the parameters didn't have annotations. (It's perhaps surprising that they didn't automatically "inherit" the annotations from the
@overloads, but I guess mypy and pyright just don't work like that.) This fixes that.Test Plan and Hands on Testing
None needed, just automated linting and tests.
Review requests
Any reason not to do this?
Risk assessment
Low.